Non-transparent report of OPCW on Douma attack is biased

Summary of Disinformation

The OPCW report on the alleged use of toxic chemicals as a weapon in Douma is full of gaps, discrepancies, and inconsistencies.

The OPCW, which announced the use of chlorine in Douma in April 2018, did not take into account elements presented by Russia, Syria and even by British journalists, in particular the recent statement by the British journalist Riam Dalati. After 6 months of investigation, according to this journalist, he could prove, without any doubt that the scene in the hospital of Douma was staged and no death occurred in the hospital.

OPCW's investigations of the use of chemical weapons are technical in nature and are designed to establish whether or not chemical weapons have been used, not to identify who used them.

The methodological considerations, activities and timeline are an integral part OPCW's final report on Douma. It does not leave any doubts on the detection of chlorine on Douma: "based on the levels of chlorinated organic derivatives, detected in several environmental samples gathered at the sites of alleged use of toxic chemicals, which are not naturally present in the environment, the FFM concludes that the objects from which the samples were taken at both locations had been in contact with one or more substances containing reactive chlorine" (page 3 of the report).

The tweet of BBC's producer Riam Dalati, mentioned in the claim, doesn't deny the chemical attack; "The producer was expressing his personal opinions about some of the video footage that emerged after the attack but has not claimed that the attack did not happen", the BBC spokesperson told Sputnik.

share with

Reported in:Issue 140

Date:11.03.2019

Language:French

Country:Russia, Syria

Keywords:Douma, White Helmets, Chemical weapons/attack

Outlet where the disinformation appeared:RT France

share with

Have you found a mistake?
Give us your feedback.

Disclaimer

The Disinformation Review focuses on key messages carried in the international information space, which have been identified as providing a partial, distorted or false view or interpretation and spreading key pro-Kremlin messaging. It does not necessarily imply, however, that the outlet concerned is linked to the Kremlin or pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. The Review is a compilation of cases from the East Stratcom Task Force’s wide network of contributors and is therefore not considered an official EU position. Likewise, the news articles are based on the analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force, so information and opinions expressed are not considered an official EU position.